Walking & cycling action plan published

you know? said:

dft.gov.ukdocuOpen ↗
ments/downloadable/dft_susttravel_029204.pdf

Every single cyclist pictured is wearing a helemt, bar one.
Mind you all the pedestrians are wearing shoes.

Colin

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:08:41 +0100, "Colin Blackburn"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Every single cyclist pictured is wearing a helemt, bar one.

Not a surprise - official DfT policy following RR30 (and not
changed despite the gradual retraction some of the more
ludicrous claims in RR30)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Is anyone else as disturbed as I am to see this new trend
towards thinking about cyclingandwalking as one word. It's
the same as the trend to use the words "vehicle" or
"traffic" to mean "not bicycles".

The announcement talks about the record of the government's
cycle strategy in increasing cycling as "mixed". That's
[censored]. It hasn't been mixed, it's been a total failure,
except in central London. In Central London the increase in
cycling is attributed to the congestion charge. That could
be partly true, but a few other factors like the Central
Line and Northern Line tube being disrupted or totally out
of service for months might be a factor, as might he fact
that we have had the best summer since the bronze age, and
that the tube, even when it's working, and Ken Livingstone's
wonderful new buses - with no opening windows - are totally
unbearable in warm weather.

The government's strategy is essentially nothing but to give
cyclists lots of farciliities, designed by idiots, for
idiots, to get cyclists away from where they will bother
proper road users, and to demonstrate that cycling on an
unchanged road is terribly dangerous and therefore
"something must be done", even if it costs the poor
overtaxed motorist even more money. That the facilities
don't actually help cyclists is of no concern to anybody, as
anyone who complains soon finds out. The farcilities
strategy continues because, from the government's point of
view, it's a success

Jeremy Parker

Jeremy Parker said:

Is anyone else as disturbed as I am to see this new trend
towards thinking about cyclingandwalking as one word. It's
the same as the trend to use the words "vehicle" or
"traffic" to mean "not bicycles".

It is a well known fact that cyclists are just peds-on-
wheels who keep their maximum speed below 12 mph at all
times to make sure that their expanded polystyrene
headwarmers will work properly. :-)

Quoted message said:

The announcement talks about the record of the
government's cycle strategy in increasing cycling as
"mixed". That's [censored]. It hasn't been mixed, it's been
a total failure, except in central London. In Central
London the increase in cycling is attributed to the
congestion charge. That could be partly true, but a few
other factors like the Central Line and Northern Line tube
being disrupted or totally out of service for months might
be a factor, as might he fact that we have had the best
summer since the bronze age, and that the tube, even when
it's working, and Ken Livingstone's wonderful new buses -
with no opening windows - are totally unbearable in warm
weather.

The government's strategy is essentially nothing but to
give cyclists lots of farciliities, designed by idiots,
for idiots, to get cyclists away from where they will
bother proper road users, and to demonstrate that cycling
on an unchanged road is terribly dangerous and therefore
"something must be done", even if it costs the poor
overtaxed motorist even more money. That the facilities
don't actually help cyclists is of no concern to anybody,
as anyone who complains soon finds out. The farcilities
strategy continues because, from the government's point of
view, it's a success

Jeremy Parker

The plan goes into great detail about how the numbers of
cyclists & pedestrians should best be counted to produce the
required outcome of the plan, i.e. a demonstrable increase
in the number of people cycling & walking. <cynic> So, all
the gubbymint have to do is make a super-deluxe shared use
route from a large housing estate straight into the
playground of a local school and close off all routes to the
school which are accessible by four wheel drive jobbies. The
before and after counts will show a massive increase in
pupils cycling and walking which is obviously representative
of the effect of the plan on a national level. </cynic>

Terry Duckmanton

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

dft.gov.ukdocuOpen ↗
ments/downloadable/dft_susttravel_029204.pdf

Interested to see the bit in the Press Release :

<<<
2. The Traffic Management Bill amendment will provide local
authorities with a power to impose penalty charges when
vehicles are driven in lanes reserved for cyclists and
when pedestrian and cycle crossings are blocked by parked
vehicles. These are not new offences: police already have
the power to enforce these offences, but this amendment
would extend those powers to local authorities.

3. The Department intends to introduce this new power next
year. Guidance will be issued for local authorities
enforcement officers in advance of the introduction of
the new powers. >>>

I'm still trying to find out if anyone has ever been
prosecuted for infringing a bike lane. Anyone know ?

Tim

[email hidden] (Tim Henderson)typed

Quoted message said:

I'm still trying to find out if anyone has ever been
prosecuted for infringing a bike lane. Anyone know ?

I don't know, but from the ads in the local Press and the
reasonably pro-cycling stance of the council, it might yet
happen in Camden...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden] Edgware.

Tim Henderson said:

I'm still trying to find out if anyone has ever been
prosecuted for infringing a bike lane. Anyone know ?

I doubt it. This isn't a totally one sided argument though.
In two places mandatory cycle lanes on my way to work reduce
the width of the road to less than a car width. I've always
wondered the legal way to deal with these, do I stop before
it gets narrow, wait for traffic to clear in the other
direction, and overtake the cycle lane???

Steve

Jeremy Parker said:

Is anyone else as disturbed as I am to see this new trend
towards thinking about cyclingandwalking as one word.

I think you are overreacting in the case of this document.
The focus is clearly on health and reduction in private
motor traffic; in those contexts it makes perfect sense to
lump cycling and walking together.

In general, I though it was a pretty decent document. Though
I have to admit the pictures of people wearing silly plastic
hats to ride utility bikes at low speeds made me a bit
nauseous. I am inured to seeing "serious"/"real" bike riders
wear helmets (heck, I even do it myself), but somehow
helmets just don't seem to fit with the idea of bike-as-
transport for the masses.

--
Peter Headland

On 18 Jun 2004 13:39:58 -0700, [email hidden] (Peter Headland)
wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Jeremy Parker said:

Is anyone else as disturbed as I am to see this new trend
towards thinking about cyclingandwalking as one word.

I think you are overreacting in the case of this document.
The focus is clearly on health and reduction in private
motor traffic; in those contexts it makes perfect sense to
lump cycling and walking together.

In general, I though it was a pretty decent document.
Though I have to admit the pictures of people wearing silly
plastic hats to ride utility bikes at low speeds made me a
bit nauseous.

Why? Silly plastic hats are pretty much only useful at
low speeds. As can be seen by the recent sad news of
racing cyclist deaths on a fast downhill decent while
wearing a helmet.

Quoted message said:

I am inured to seeing "serious"/"real" bike riders wear
helmets (heck, I even do it myself), but somehow helmets
just don't seem to fit with the idea of bike-as-transport
for the masses.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗